Engaging All Stakeholders to Create a Trusted, Data-Driven, Process Improvement Approach to Addressing Learner Mistreatment.

Problem: Learner mistreatment has remained an ongoing challenge in academic medicine despite accreditation requirements mandating that every program has systems in place to prevent and respond to mistreatment. While efforts vary across institutions, much remains unanswered in the literature about best practices. Additionally, for the foreseeable future, challenges in the learning environment will likely continue and potentially worsen, given the confluence of multiple external stressors including the COVID-19 pandemic, faculty burnout and general political divisiveness in the nation. It is essential, therefore, to focus on indicators of improvement via process metrics such as knowledge and awareness of mistreatment policies and procedures, willingness to report, reasons for not reporting, and satisfaction with having made a report, while simultaneously focusing on the more complex challenge of eliminating mistreatment occurrences. Intervention: We describe the aspects of our mistreatment prevention and response system first implemented in 2017 along with process and outcome measures. The interventions included expanding our policy outlining appropriate conduct in the teacher-learner relationship; a graduated response protocol to allegations of mistreatment with a clear escalation approach; an online reporting system; a graduate medical education exit survey which mirrors the AAMC Graduation Questionnaire on mistreatment; a robust communication and professional development campaign; a comprehensive data dashboard; and a comprehensive summary report dissemination plan. Context: The interventions were implemented at the largest allopathic medical school in the U.S., with nine campuses across the state. The system is available to all learners, including medical students, graduate students, residents, and fellows. Impact: Both institutional and national data sources have informed the continuous improvement strategies. Data from internal reporting systems, institutional surveys, and national data are presented from 2017 to 2021. Findings include an increasing number of incidents reported each year, including confidential reports from students who include their contact information rather than report anonymously, which we view as an indicator of learner trust in the system. Our data also show consistent improvements in learners' awareness of the policy and procedures and satisfaction with having made a report. We also include other data such as the nature of complaints submitted and timeliness of our institutional response. Lessons Learned: We present several lessons learned that may guide other institutions looking to similarly improve their mistreatment systems, such as a close partnership between faculty affairs, diversity affairs, and educational affairs leadership; communication, professional development, and training through multiple venues and with all stakeholders; easily accessible reporting with anonymous and confidential options and the ability to report on behalf of others; policy development guidance; data transparency and dissemination; and trust-building activities and ongoing feedback from learners.

Diversifying Faculty Leadership in Academic Medicine: The Program to Launch Underrepresented in Medicine Success (PLUS).

PLUS (Program to Launch Underrepresented in Medicine Success) is a 2-year cohort program at Indiana University School of Medicine providing professional development, funding and skills to produce scholarship, and a community to mitigate social and/or professional isolation for underrepresented in medicine (URiM) faculty. In year 1, scholars participate in leadership and professional development seminars and regular meetings with their mentor(s). They are assigned a PLUS Advisory Council advisor with whom they meet 2 to 3 times annually. In year 2, scholars participate in monthly seminars focused on research methods, writing productivity, and wellness. Additionally, scholars engage in a writing accountability group and practice reflective writing. Connections events, designed to combat isolation and cultivate community, occur monthly. At program completion, scholars complete a project resulting in a scholarly product for submission and dissemination in a peer-reviewed forum. To date, 3 cohorts, totaling 24 people, have participated: 20 (83%) Black, 4 (17%) Latinx; 12 (50%) females. Five scholars have completed the full program, whose pre- and postsurvey results are described. Program surveys demonstrate significant gains in scholars' confidence to secure leadership opportunities, connect with colleagues, and advocate for themselves and others. Scholars reported statistically significant increases in confidence to pursue leadership roles (t = -3.67, P = .02) and intent to submit their dossier for promotion (t = -6.50, P = .003). They were less likely to leave academic medicine (t = 2.75, P = .05) or pursue another academic appointment (t = 2.75, P = .05) after PLUS completion than at baseline. All scholars adequately met requirements for their third-year review (tenure track only), were promoted, or achieved tenure in less than 3 years since program completion. This article describes PLUS program objectives, evaluative components, and lessons learned during implementation, as a model to support URiM faculty at other institutions.

An expanded model of faculty vitality in academic medicine.

Many faculty in today's academic medical centers face high levels of stress and low career satisfaction. Understanding faculty vitality is critically important for the health of our academic medical centers, yet the concept is ill-defined and lacking a comprehensive model. Expanding on previous research that examines vital faculty in higher education broadly and in academic medical centers specifically, this study proposes an expanded model of the unique factors that contribute to faculty vitality in academic medicine. We developed an online survey on the basis of a conceptual model (N = 564) and used linear regression to investigate the fit of the model. We examined the relationships of two predictor variables measuring Primary Unit Climate and Leadership and Career and Life Management with an overall Faculty Vitality index comprised of three measures: Professional Engagement, Career Satisfaction, and Productivity. The findings revealed significant predictive relationships between Primary Unit Climate and Leadership, Career and Life Management, and Faculty Vitality. The overall model accounted for 59% of the variance in the overall Faculty Vitality Index. The results provide new insights into the developing model of faculty vitality and inform initiatives to support faculty in academic medical centers. Given the immense challenges faced by faculty, now more than ever do we need reliable evidence regarding what sustains faculty vitality.